Introduction
Agreements on International Public Policy have never been as abundant as in the last century. In the meantime, Globalisation has become a major phenomenon around the world, at various levels. So, it will be interesting to know if globalisation makes agreements on International Public Policy easier or harder.
Looking towards history, Globalisation has deeply affected both national and international way of governance. Focus will be made on the economical and political aspects of globalisation and its effects on IPP1 in those fields.
“Globalisation” has been very difficult to define clearly, and many scholars tried to give a accurate description. To link globalisation to IPP, let's see how agreements on IPP evolved concurrently to globalisation, some successfully, some with failure.
Aspects like climate change, human right law, the European Union, WTO, World Bank and the financial crisis of 2008 will be examined to demonstrate that globalisation had a paradoxical effect on global governance, but mostly positive.
As globalisation was expanding, agreements on IPP were made easier towards international institutions. But, a question rises among this assumption: Is it ONLY globalisation that eased agreements on IPP? Or does crises play a role too ?
At the end of this paper, the relation between IPP and crises will be analysed and linked to globalisation in order to conclude on the topic.
1: IPP = International Public Policy

Correlation between IPP and Globalisation
“Globalisation” is an old process that started way before the 20th century. In fact, the first signs of globalisation appeared with the first merchants that used to travel from a country to an another to buy and sell theirs goods. But “globalisation...
... middle of paper ...
...ccessed 18/11/2013
http://www.globalpolicy.org/globalization/globalization-of-law/international-justice.htm
accessed 15/11/2013
http://www.culturaldiplomacy.org/academy/content/pdf/participant-papers/2011-12- cdac/Globalization-and-International-Relations-Lianna-Amirkhanyan.pdf
accessed 20/11/2013
Samir Naim-Ahmed, 'Human Rights And Globalization' , 21 April, 2007
Madjid Tehrani, 'Global Communication and International Relations changing paradigms and
policies' January 1997 ISSN 1085-7494 Volume 2, Number 1
Miles Wolpin, 'Fair Trade Standards, Economic Well-Being and Human Rights as Costs of Free
Trade', January 1997 ISSN 1085-7494 Volume 2, Number 1
Jonathan Luckhurst, 'From Globalization to Global Governance?', Chapter in Potiño Manfer, R. and Rios de los Angeles, A., eds. (2011) Contemporary Themes of Economic Law Mexico City Editorial Porrúa and UNAM
The rebellion in Chiapas and subsequent stalemate were portrayed the world over as a battle between those opposed to globalization, the Zapatistas, and those in favour of globalization, the Mexican government. Those who claim the Zapatistas are anti-globalization generally mean that they are protesting against the trade liberalization policies of the Mexican government and the loss of control of their indigenous culture. Those who support the Mexican government agree that the Mexican government is pursuing trade liberalization policies but claim that these policies are ultimately beneficial to the Mexican people. There is nothing particularly incorrect about these arguments, as both sides properly capture an aspect of globalization. However, it is too easy and simplistic to characterize this rebellion as a simple battle between pro- and anti-globalization forces. To do so would use an incomplete definition of globalization and fail to fully analyze the situation. An examination of the situation reveals that both the Zapatistas and the Mexican government are opposed to some parts of the globalization process while concurrently benefiting from other facets. Hence, the paradox of globalization is revealed: one can be opposed to globalization while simultaneously deriving extraordinary benefit from globalization.
The systems of political and socio-economical value are some of the most important when it comes to countries survival. The countries in today’s world, some prefer to be as involved and as cooperative globally as others, while others prefer to stay to itself and prefer to be as away and as uninvolved to the global efforts as possible. The terms for these as explained would be globalization, Globalization is a process of interaction and integration among the people, companies, and governments of different nations, a process is driven by international trade and investment and aided by information technology, and protectionism, protectionism is the economic policy of restraining trade between states (countries) through methods such as tariffs on imported goods, restrictive quotas, and a variety of other government regulations. The two policies both have their own pros and cons, but in the end, globalization is the best choice to go
Globalization, a fundamentally constructive revolution, is the catalyst driving the current situation. On the international level, globalization creates jobs, promotes trade, and encourages cooperation between countries. The interconnected nature of national economies creates a net that not only helps sustain troubled economies, but actually discourages international hostilities by introducing an additional layer of reciprocity. Through globalizat...
When the term “Globalization” is discussed, most academics, scholars, professionals and intellectuals attempt to define and interpret it in a summarized fashion. My main concern with this approach is that one cannot and should not define a process that altered decades of history and continues to, in less than 30 words. Global Shift is a book with remarkable insight. Peter Dicken rather than attempting to define the commonly misused word, explains Globalization in a clear and logical fashion, which interconnects numerous views. Dicken takes full advantage of his position to write and identify the imperative changes of political, economic, social, and technological dimensions of globalization.
(Bilton et al 1996:5) The process of globalization has certainly had many changing effects to the world we live in; it has also changed the way many factors operate. Globalization is said "to have transformed the structure and scale of human relationships that social, cultural, political, and economic processes now operate at a global scale with a consequent reduction in the significance of other geographical scales. "(The Dictionary of human geography 2004:315) Globalization has had both positive and negative effects on a local, national, international and global level. Globalization often brings benefits at one level which cause negative effects at another, these results and the scale at which they manifest are often uncertain and unpredictable.
For example, states remain the key negotiators and entities in major global governance entities. Additionally, states retain compulsory power over their subjects or constituents, a form of control that new players in global governments have generally not obtained. Globalization has led to several substantial changes in global governance and the entities participating in governance activities. First, over the past 70 years, an increasing number of nations have signed onto international agreements. For example, when the Global Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT) was created in 1947, it had no institutional structure; by 2009, though, more than 150 nations – accounting for 97% of world trade – were members of GATT’s successor, the World Trade Organization (Fidler, 2009).
Another important factor promoted globalization is called the ‘World Politics’. Foreign policymakers are facing a challenge of a fundamental change in nowadays ...
... financial crisis (domestic and global), countries are known to secure tenuous national assets to reaffirm regional hegemony. Ultimately, lower global growth rates heighten the risk of conflict as they have in Argentina, and more recently, in East Asia.
Baylis, Smith and Patricia Owens. 2014. The 'Standard' of the 'Standard'. The globalization of world politics: An introduction to international relations. London.
Krain, Matthew (2005), “AP Comparative Government and Politics Briefing Paper: Globalization,” [http://apcentral.collegeboard.com/apc/public/repository/ap05_comp_govpol_glob_42253.pdf], accessed 15 May 2012.
Globalization, the acceleration and strengthening of worldwide interactions among people, companies and governments, has taken a huge toll on the world, both culturally and economically. It’s generating a fast-paced, increasingly tied world and also praising individualism. It has been a massive subject of matter amongst scientists, politicians, government bureaucrats and the normal, average human population. Globalization promoted the independence of nations and people, relying on organizations such as the World Bank and also regional organizations such as the BRICs that encourage “a world free of poverty” (World Bank). Despite the fact that critics can argue that globalization is an overall positive trend, globalization has had a rather negative cultural and economic effect such as the gigantic wealth gaps and the widespread of American culture, “Americanization”; globalization had good intentions but bad results.
...stable economic, social, political and environmental policies, proper channels of communication and end of dominion of Core Countries is necessary. Globalization needs to be reformed in order to salvage it from becoming a dysfunctional ideology.
Joel R Campbell, Leena Thacker Kumar, and Steve Slagle. "Bargaining Sovereignty: State Power and Networked Governance in a Globalizing World." International Social Science Review 85.3/4 (2010): 107. Print.
Globalisation is a very complex term with various definitions, in business terms, “globalization describes the increasingly global nature of markets, the tendency for transnational businesses to configure their business activities on a worldwide basis, and to co-ordinate and integrate their strategies and operations across national boundaries” (Stonehouse, Campbell, Hamill and Purdie, 2004, p. 5).
The word globalisation is often assumed to be a relatively recent emergence in world history, however although the ancestry and precise timescale of the use of the term is nebulous for ease of analysis many scholars suggest the 1980s to be the era in which the seeds of globalisation were set and subsequently initiated historians and fellow scholars alike to begin to question the existence and effects of globalisation.